LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
[Letters of the length of one of our leading paragraphs are often more read, and therefore more effective, than those which fill treble the space.] THE USES OF ADVERTISEMENT.
ITO THE EDITOR OP THE " 8PECT‘70103
have been much interested in your article of August 9th on " The Uses of Advertisement." I would like to know who
are the " we " referred to in the first line of the article, who are to -teach "the men and women of to-day" what they ought to know—" who," in fact, " is the Potter. pray, and who the Pot ? " And would it not be useful if we were to remove the beam in our own eye bgfore dealing with the mote in theirs ?
I dare say that I shall be told that " we " are the ordinary sane responsible people of the country, the educated people, the governing classes, or something equally platitudinarian; but, as a matter of fact, is it really those classes who take it upon themselves to instruct the public ? I hardly think so. I think it is the journalists. For any remarks which I may make in this connexion I apologize in advance to the editor of the Spectator and his staff. Such remarks are not intended for them. I have been a reader and, to an extent, an admirer of the Spectator for many years, and have always accorded to its dicta the respect to which their weight entitles them. I must confess, however, that I have never yet understood why the profession of newsvendor should entitle a man to be the guide and philosopher of the people—much less their friend. With permission, I take rather the view of Mr. Justice Shallow, who on a well-remembered occasion felt himself obliged to remind ancient Pistol, that " If, Sir, you come with news . I take it there's but two ways, either to utter them, or to conceal them." And it may be remembered that ancient Pistol, who seems in all respects (saving only his wit) to have been an exact copy of certain British journalists of to-day, sprang at once to the conclusion that there was no money in concealing them.
The newspaper Barons, however, and Lords of the Press, do not at all take the view of Mr. Shallow. If the published reports of 'their banquets are correct, they make speeches, and toast each other, as the great "moulder " of public opinion. In other words, they undertake to tell the man in the street what they think he should think, and what they think lie should do, in the affairs of life and the problems of the moment. This is known as propaganda. But the matt in the street does not like being told what he should think, and what he should do—by somebody else. In fact there are times when lie hates it. Unless of course that some one has deserved, or has won, by his record, his character, or his achievements some great place in the people's sympathy and regard.
For example, could such a one as, say, Kitchener, or Nelson, return, and speak to the English of Duty, would they not hear ? Or if Gordon or Sir Philip Sidney could speak of Honour, would they not answer ? Is it moreover the same with the Lords of the Press ? Is my Lord So-and-so indeed the only exponent in England of decency, or does Mr. Such-a-one beer the only record for honesty, that they should profess and teach those things? That celebrated professional journalisf and bludgeoner, the Right Honourable Sir Booster Blazer, is no doubt an expert on the uses of advertisement, a prodigious Authority on noise. But does that qualify him to lead the people in a national emergency ? I hardly think so. The man in the street does not think so. President Lincoln laid it down that you "cannot fool all the people all the time." Another fatal drawback to the propaganda system as adopted by our leading exponents is this. If you keep on the cry of " Wolf ! " with sufficient insistence and monotony where there is no wolf, the people will soon cease to take the slightest notice of it, even if there is a wolf.
Take, for example, the recent outbursts of propaganda on the coal crisis. Under other circumstances the people in the street would have agreed that the Government statement of the situation (with reservations) was correct. They would have seen that the situation was serious, or, if not serious, that, at all events, they would have to pay as much for their coal as if it was, and they would have acted. As it was, there has been so much propaganda on the subject that the people are left without the capacity of really believing in the emer- gency even if it should he there.
People are turned to dull resentment by the insistent blare and clamorous strider with which certain experts din their propaganda into them. This dull resentment, however, is nothing when compared with the fury roused in their minds by the suspicion—in fact, the certainty—that all this clangour is not only not inspired, but is not even honest; that at the back of it is a ring or combine which desires to exploit them. For example, take the recent position adopted by certain papers —viz., that there is little or no profiteering, or that profiteering
is not the only or even the principal cause of high prices. The man in the street, not being imbecile, knows perfectly
that profiteering is not the only cause of high prices, but he also knows that it is one of the principal causes and the only removable one as well as the most disgraceful one. He sees
twopenny reels of cotton being sold for eightpence, and reports of the meetings of shareholders of the company which does it are not hidden from him, nor are the obituary notices of di-rectors who-die, showing the Millions they leaVe. He reads
speeches by the Presidents of boards of directors alluding blandly to their great profits, but pointing out how much greater these could have been but for the control of a fatuous Government. (The absence of camouflage among the profiteers of the present day is one of the most interesting signs of the times.) People read of vast catches of herring thrown back into the sea to rot rather than that they should be sold at a reasonable price to the poor. They see apples sold at 5s. 6d. the pound which cost, even in these times, but a few pence to grow. They read of vegetables and lettuce ploughed back into the ground to maintain an inflated fancy price for those of them which do go to market.
To maintain in face of this evidence that there is little or no profiteering is not merely silly. It makes it practically impos- sible for the ordinary people to believe propaganda even should it be true. It therefore seems to me that before we try to educate the people we should be quite certain of the sincerity of our motives and of the worthiness of those who assume this duty. We should, in fact, attend to the beam in our own eye before commencing operations with regard to the mote in our
[When we used the word " we " we were only trying to put ourselves in the position of the Government. We think this is clear from the article. The Government should act. as the instructor of us all, not the Press. Was it not Matthew Arnold who remarked that if all the writers who wield the weighty editorial " we" were placed together in Hyde Park for the inspection of the public, the public would know exactly what to think of " we " ?Ero. Spectator.]
Previous page
